Found Deceased FL - Madeline Soto, 13, Missing Child Alert, 13500 blk Town Loop Blvd, Orlando, 26 Feb 2024 *arrest* #10

[wtiger]

The urgency on the defence side could easily be to prevent LE from further electronic analysis - using the "habeus corpus" - you have a case against me? well let's see what you have!

probably knows that time would only strengthen the prosecution case in my opinion

 

[ttjo]

[bolded by me]

I've heard of, occasionally, policies or local laws requiring victim involvement for criminal case decisions--these are typically for cases involving domestic/intimate partner violence (eg. the state cannot prosecute an abuser without participation from a complaining witness/victim). But by and large, it is just a courtesy for the state to get victim/family approval for any actions.

In the US, it is basically (generalizing here) like this: In a criminal case, the defendant is accused of breaking a law, and the state is the "injured" party for that violation of law, which is why the cases are named something like The People of West Virginia vs. the Defendant. It's a courtesy to have a participating and satisfied victim, and it makes things easier for the prosecution, but it is not a requirement. A civil case is where the victim can directly seek restitution as the injured party.

In practice, I think the prosecution always wants the victim/family to be happy with their actions, but I can think of two factors here that might affect that. First, this case has become very public, and so there will be political, etc. repercussions for whatever the outcome is. Second, there is a possibly complicated family situation to try and consider, since the victim's parents may not be on the same page and the custodial parent (JS) is suspected by some to have been involved in the crime.

Thank you, this makes total sense and sounds fair. It's an ethical consideration, I dont know if they could do it any other way. Imagine how difficult things would be if you had to have family approval ( the issues: exactly what you said above)
Prosecutors have an ethical duty to prosecute when possible (if enough evidence to convict etc) and also an ethical duty to maintain the public's faith in the justice system.

 

[Mack the Knife]

Thank you, this makes total sense and sounds fair. It's an ethical consideration, I dont know if they could do it any other way. Imagine how difficult things would be if you had to have family approval ( the issues: exactly what you said above)
Prosecutors have an ethical duty to prosecute ( if enough evidence to convict etc) and also an ethical duty to maintain the public's faith in the justice system.

Strays from the topic here a bit, but IMO it can also be a horrible thing to put on a victim/family. Should an offender's fate be in a victim's/family's hands? Should outcomes be impacted by how much weight, how many resources, a victim/family is able to put into the case? Should offenders be incentivized to victimize high-risk victims for whom no one cares? Should a victim/family be burdened with tracking hearings (eg. parole, sentencing) and deciding if or how to be involved?

For justice's sake, I get the desire to appease and please the victim/family, but I think there is a danger in intentionally reducing objectivity in the system. A very difficult thing to weigh.


To take it back to this case: I think the case is so public, and public distrust of JS is so high, I can't imagine prosecutors would openly consider specifically her opinion here. Also because of the publicity (and because, though the timing didn't work this way because of when the law was passed, the CSA crimes are considered by Florida to be death penalty-worthy), I can't imagine the death penalty being taken off the table for SS. Even if SS pleads guilty, unless the death penalty is waived by the prosecution, a jury makes the decision on the death penalty, unless SS waives the right to a jury. It's not clear to me what happens if he waives the jury there, but I imagine that means a judge makes the decision, and the judge would still want to evaluate the same evidence that a jury would be privy to. And after a death sentence is imposed, the Florida Supreme Court reviews every single case, even if the defendant doesn't want it. So I think there is no way to get out of enduring hearings and difficult things entered into evidence (for the victim's/family's benefit) and thus no way for SS to get out of the prosecution seeking the death penalty.

 

[ttjo]

Strays from the topic here a bit, but IMO it can also be a horrible thing to put on a victim/family. Should an offender's fate be in a victim's/family's hands? Should outcomes be impacted by how much weight, how many resources, a victim/family is able to put into the case? Should offenders be incentivized to victimize high-risk victims for whom no one cares? Should a victim/family be burdened with tracking hearings (eg. parole, sentencing) and deciding if or how to be involved?

For justice's sake, I get the desire to appease and please the victim/family, but I think there is a danger in intentionally reducing objectivity in the system. A very difficult thing to weigh.

There is no standard in emotion, grieving or healing. The range is too wide and then factor in the timing also, It would be impossible to regulate the impact that would have on sentencing. We have some restorative justice programs here that can be used in addition to sentencing. sometimes before a trial sometimes years after. These programs are very victim-focused and aim to address harm. It is not about forgiveness. It is at the request of the victim and involves a lot of preparation, in minor cases it can happen sooner in bigger cases much later ( even years later, if at all) it's in its infant stages, and not hugely accepted here yet.

 

[ttjo]

Lock him up and throw away the prison.

JMO

The whole prison or just the key? lol. I vote for the whole prison.

 

[Vaderman]

Now that the four month mark has passed, I wonder why the mother still hasn't faced any charges.

 

[Megnut]

What could be worse than what they already know, we have a play-by-play on CCTV.
I know there is likely no plea deal, but asking for info only.
In the US would a family need to agree to a plea deal or can the state make that offer on their own?

The State might be in conversation with a family, but ultimately it's the State's position that matters.

Not saying they will or should, but the State could drop the murder charges if he were to plead guilty to the CSA, which carries the DP all by itself in Florida. A solid guilty plea might preclude appeal. Tie it up tight.

I always need to remind myself that the US criminal justice system is not about justice for the victims. It is exclusively for justice for the criminal. Fair trial, appointed counsel, rule of law, etc. We take our freedoms seriously here, as well the repeal of them.

Much for the State to weigh.

Practical matters. The charges. The costs. The scope. The witnesses. The victims.

The CSA alone will bury him. He pleads guilty, the State can be spared the cost and effort to prosecute him for the murder.

He's not going anywhere, well except from jail to prison, really only a matter of WHERE in prison he goes. Death Row or solitary.

I don't believe in the DP for my own personal reasons, but SS is exactly the kind of violation against humanity for violating a child for whom the DP was invented.

JMO

 

[Mack the Knife]

Now that the four month mark has passed, I wonder why the mother still hasn't faced any charges.

What kind of charges are you thinking?

Personally, IMO, I'd be shocked if she is ever charged for the murder or cover-up. Regardless of suspicions, none of the publicly available evidence inculpates JS in any specific involvement, while it is plenty damning for SS. SS could be a witness against her, but no one would trust him.

I'm not familiar with what charges might be applicable if it is the case that JS did not actively participate in MS's murder nor the cover-up. Are bad parents/guardians typically charged after the murder of their children, if they were not directly involved with the murder? I'm thinking, for example, of Audrii Cunningham, whose accused murderer Don Steven Mcdougal lived in a trailer on the property of Audrii's home and sometimes was left alone with her, despite a significant violent history, several white supremacist tattoos, and a conviction for crimes against a child.

 

[ttjo]

I always need to remind myself that the US criminal justice system is not about justice for the victims. It is exclusively for justice for the criminal. Fair trial, appointed counsel, rule of law, etc. We take our freedoms seriously here, as well the repeal of them.

I forget that too until I am rudely awakened. People wonder why the crime rate is getting worse. At least where I live it is.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Now that the four month mark has passed, I wonder why the mother still hasn't faced any charges.

Maybe, it's possible that LE have found zero evidence to charge her with any crime?

Keeping in mind, MS's mother was never named as a suspect in this case, by LE.
Yes, there will be claims that she was also never "ruled out" by those who have treated her essentially as guilty of knowing, or covering, or even participating in the vile acts of abuse against her, but here we are, months later and no charges against anyone but SS.

Those are the facts as it stands to date, in this case. One suspect, currently charged, in custody, awaiting trial.